Ron Paul: Foreign Policy Radical?

Below is a video with highlights from the 2000 Presidential Debates by George W. Bush on his foreign policy ideas. If I’m not mistaken, he sounds a lot like Ron Paul when it comes to being over-deployed, being overly involved in the internal affairs of other nations and getting into fights we have no exit strategy from. Who knew that George W. Bush was unelectable and completely impossible to sell as a candidate to the conservatives of the Republican party with such a weak, isolationist foreign policy?

I guess it doesn’t matter if you have a more non-interference based foreign policy (as George W. Bush campaigned upon and Ron Paul does now) so long as you are for other big government things like expanding Medicare, expanding the Department of Education, etc. as Bush campaigned and delivered upon. I wonder who the real conservatives are in this party if Bush could win in 2000, but Paul is unelectable in 2012?

One Response

  1. While the argument here is compelling, it is a hard one to sell to someone like myself who did not support George W. Bush in 2000, at least not until he was the nominee and my choice was between him. Ralph Nader, and Al Gore. However, I will admmit to viewing Bush’s call to get out of the business of nation building, in a positive light at the time. Then unfortuantely came 9/11 and like George Bush, I learned that I would rather take the steps that could prevent 9/11-like aggression from occurring before it happens as opposed to turning a blind eye to potential havens of terror and violence.

    For me it essentially comes down to balance.

    I refuse to ignore what I see as a candidate who as president, would refuse to effectively handle the primary consititutional responsibilities of a president. And while I do not want a President who will invade Germany just for the hell of it, I also do not want a president who does not understand the strategic value and defensive importance of having military bases in Germany.

    If I could elect Ron Paul Secretary of the Treasury, or Chairman of the Federal Reserve, I would do so in a minute and hope that he could actually achieve something instead of simply talk about it as he has done for two decades. But I do not have that luxury. But I do have the luxury of dismissing Ron Paul much the same way that he dismisses the dangers of a nuclear Iran.

    Couple all that with Ron Paul’s basic blame America first attitude and his attempts to claim that the United States was responsible for bringing 9/11 on itself and not only do find Ron Paul to be a candidate that I totally disagree with on a critical area of federal responsibility, I also find myself dealing with a candidate who offends me and whose judgement I must call in to question far too much to consider supporting him for a position that rightly or wrongly is condsidered to be that of the leader of the free world.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: